Emerging Concepts for Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery: What is Cure?

The objective of this review is to discuss emerging concepts in pelvic organ prolapse, in particular, “What is cure?” In a post-trial data analysis of the CARE (Colpopexy and Urinary Reduction Efforts) trial, treatment success varied tremendously depending on the definition used (19.2%–97.2%). Definitions that included the absence of vaginal bulge symptoms had the strongest relationships with the patients’ assessment of overall improvement and treatment success. As demonstrated by this study, there are several challenges in defining cure in prolapse surgery. Additionally, the symptoms of prolapse are variable. The degree of prolapse does not correlate directly with symptoms. There are many surgical approaches to pelvic organ prolapse. Multiple ways to quantify prolapse are used. There is a lack of standardized definition of cure. The data on prolapse surgery outcomes are heterogeneous. The goal of surgical repair is to return the pelvic organs to their original anatomic positions. Ideally, we have four main goals: no anatomic prolapse, no functional symptoms, patient satisfaction, and the avoidance of complications. The impact of transvaginal mesh requires thoughtful investigation. The driving force should be patient symptoms in defining cure of prolapse.

[1]  M. Barber,et al.  Pelvic organ prolapse: defining the disease. , 2010, Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery.

[2]  L. Brubaker,et al.  New pelvic symptoms are common after reconstructive pelvic surgery. , 2009, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[3]  R. Pauls,et al.  Impact of gynecological surgery on female sexual function , 2010, International Journal of Impotence Research.

[4]  L. Meyn,et al.  Pelvic Symptoms in Women With Pelvic Organ Prolapse , 2004, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[5]  S. Salvatore,et al.  The relationship of vaginal prolapse severity tosymptoms and quality of life , 2005, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[6]  J. Jelovsek,et al.  Women seeking treatment for advanced pelvic organ prolapse have decreased body image and quality of life. , 2006, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[7]  M. Makuuchi,et al.  Scenario 1 : Complication After a Surgical Procedure Not Caused by a Surgeon , 2022 .

[8]  J. Colling,et al.  Epidemiology of Surgically Managed Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Urinary Incontinence , 1997, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[9]  R. Freeman,et al.  Is the pelvic organ prolapse quantification system (POPQ) being used? A survey of members of the International Continence Society (ICS) and the American Urogynecologic Society (AUGS) , 2003, International Urogynecology Journal.

[10]  S. Swift,et al.  The distribution of pelvic organ support in a population of female subjects seen for routine gynecologic health care. , 2000, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[11]  G. Davila,et al.  “Eyeball” POP-Q examination: shortcut or valid assessment tool? , 2010, International Urogynecology Journal.

[12]  M. Barber,et al.  Adoption of the pelvic organ prolapse quantification system in peer-reviewed literature. , 2003, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[13]  E. Lukacz,et al.  Predictive value of prolapse symptoms: a large database study , 2005, International Urogynecology Journal.

[14]  L. Cardozo,et al.  Validation of the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) for urogenital prolapse , 2010, International Urogynecology Journal.

[15]  C. Ghetti,et al.  Pelvic organ descent and symptoms of pelvic floor disorders. , 2005, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[16]  C. Maher,et al.  Pelvic organ prolapse surgery , 2013 .

[17]  E. Vittinghoff,et al.  Pelvic organ prolapse surgery in the United States, 1997. , 2002, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[18]  E. Vittinghoff,et al.  Cost of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery in the United States , 2001, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[19]  M. Barber.  Symptoms and Outcome Measures of Pelvic Organ Prolapse , 2005, Clinical obstetrics and gynecology.

[20]  A. O'Boyle,et al.  Pelvic Organ Support Study (POSST): the distribution, clinical definition, and epidemiologic condition of pelvic organ support defects. , 2005, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[21]  M. Carey,et al.  Vaginal repair with mesh versus colporrhaphy for prolapse: a randomised controlled trial , 2009, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[22]  W. Steers,et al.  Patient-centered goals for pelvic floor dysfunction surgery: what is success, and is it achieved? , 2002, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[23]  B. Ridgeway,et al.  Biologic Grafts and Synthetic Meshes in Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery , 2007, Clinical obstetrics and gynecology.

[24]  R. Dmochowski,et al.  The Standardization of Terminology for Researchers in Female Pelvic Floor Disorders , 2001, International Urogynecology Journal.

[25]  C. Spino,et al.  Defining Success After Surgery for Pelvic Organ Prolapse , 2009, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[26]  C. Maher,et al.  Complication and Reoperation Rates After Apical Vaginal Prolapse Surgical Repair: A Systematic Review , 2009, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[27]  G. Cundiff,et al.  Correlation of symptoms with location and severity of pelvic organ prolapse. , 2001, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[28]  C. Bradley,et al.  Vaginal Wall Descensus and Pelvic Floor Symptoms in Older Women , 2005, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[29]  K. Kluivers,et al.  Predictive factors for overactive bladder symptoms after pelvic organ prolapse surgery , 2010, International Urogynecology Journal.